From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
To: Nageswara R Sastry <rnsastry@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com, svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
davej@codemonkey.org.uk
Subject: Re: [BUG] While changing the cpufreq governor, kernel hits a bug in workqueue.c
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:07:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d4lqq7ec.fsf@saeurebad.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4871E657.3040403@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Nageswara R. Sastry's message of "Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:18:07 +0530")
Hi,
Nageswara R Sastry <rnsastry@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> Hi Johannes,
>>>> =======================================================
>>>> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>>>> 2.6.25.7.cpufreq_patch #2
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
> [...]
>>> Okay, the problem is in cpufreq_conservative.c. We
>>> cancel_delayed_work_sync() while holding the mutex, but the work itself
>>> tries to grab it and there it deadlocks; lockdep caught that right.
>>>
>>> The hunk for _ondemand is correct, but the one for _conservative is
>>> obviously wrong, sorry :/
>>>
>>> I will whip something up and get back to you. Thanks a lot for
>>> testing!
>>
>> Could you try the attached patch instead of the one above?
>>
>> Dave, I dropped the mutex-grabbing from the conservative worker function
>> as well as I don't see a reason for it, please correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
>> Hannes
>>
>
> The script is running now for more than 6 hours successfully, I will
> continue this and let you know if there are any failures.
>
> * I am seeing the circular locking dependency with the above patch
> too.
Uhm. Failure or no failure? A possible dead-lock report _is_ a
failure. So, do you get one or not? And if so, could you send me the
dmesg parts?
Thanks a lot,
Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-07 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-23 10:51 [BUG] While changing the cpufreq governor, kernel hits a bug in workqueue.c Nageswara R Sastry
2008-06-23 15:26 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-06-24 9:17 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-06-25 19:47 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-06-25 20:00 ` Dave Jones
2008-06-26 12:18 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-06-26 13:31 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-06-27 4:12 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-07-01 14:00 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-04 13:56 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-07 9:48 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-07-07 11:07 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2008-07-08 5:52 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-07-10 11:11 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-15 3:42 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-07-16 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-12 8:12 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-08-12 21:29 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-08-12 21:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-07 9:41 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-10-28 3:29 ` Nageswara R Sastry
2008-07-07 11:19 ` Nageswara R Sastry
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87d4lqq7ec.fsf@saeurebad.de \
--to=hannes@saeurebad.de \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rnsastry@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox